I spoke at this hearing today and will include the recollected version of my testimonial, considering I improvised most of my speech…

… for John Jay Hooker, in essence, said what I intended to say, and said it with much more history to substantiate, but was met with a feigned scoffing and joking by a few of the panelists, which may have been in jest, but very telling. John Jay Hooker’s delivery went to the heart of the matter and I spoke out “Amen” on several occasions not realizing I was violating protocol, apparently, and I started a round of applause for him that was met with a rap of the gavel by the legislator who acted as “chairperson” of this hearing. There were approximately 15-20 panelists (legislators for the most part), but they were positioned far enough away from the audience that I did not retain most of the identities represented on their name plates.

(civilians were only allowed 4 minutes to present).

In my perception, there was a certain sense of hostility from some of the legislators due to my blogging and notoriety for being outspoken pertaining to the Court of the Judiciary and Judge Randy Kennedy.

That said, I will try my best to recreate accurately, along with [commentary], and including the comments and questions legislators presented.

My opening remarks were addressed to Mr. Timothy Discenza, who I have addressed and discussed in previous blogs.

“I would like to start by telling Mr. Discenza that he is much more handsome in person than the picture I’ve posted on my web site. It’s a pleasure to see you in person, Mr. Discenza.”

Timothy Discenza, lead counsel, COJ, and “more handsome”

Then I turned to Mr. John Jay Hooker , legendary attorney in Nashville, whose words stole the heart of my prepared speech and I gave him a “Bravo” for his poignant testimony,

Legendary John Jay Hooker, attorney

Then I informed the panel that, as an entertainer in consideration of the stodgy environment these hearings create, I would like to offer some entertainment, but asked for some latitude, for there would be an important legal statement behind what I was offering as entertainment. Then I proceeded like this:

“Everyone here has heard the story of Cinderella, but country comedian Archie Campbell entertained us with turning the words around into the story of Rindercella. It goes like this:

“Ponce atone a whime, in a coreign fountry, there lived a geautiful bird named Rindercella. Now, Rindercella lived with her mugly other and her two sad blisters…”

There was a look of confusion on the face of most of the panelists, but I continued by saying,

“For the sake of time, I will skip to the end of the story which goes like this:”

“The storal of this mory is, if you go to a bancy fall, and want a pransome hince to lall in fove with you, don’t forget to slop your dripper.” I don’t think anyone even chuckled, but there were smiles. (Cinderella v. Rindercella )

Then, I paused, gazing across the panel, then proceeded by stating:

“The reason I present this story is not just for entertainment, but an intriguing way to demonstrate that when the word “LAW” is turned and spelled backwards it’s pronounced “Wall”.

“The LAW has become a WALL that stands between “we, the people” and the Constitution and our God-given rights, a cob-web that obstructs our view from the intent of our founding fathers who rose up against a tyranny. It has, in effect, stripped away the power that was meant to remain in the hands of “we, the people”, in which individual liberties were paramount. Our legislature is populated by attorneys turned legislators, and they create more LAW that is as indecipherable to most civilians as Rindercella is to you, our public servants.”

“In a real Democracy, there should always be a revolution going on to make sure tyranny never rises up within our own government, but the LAW as a WALL has been built like the Walls of Jericho, and there is an army of civilians here today blowing their trumpets to bring down this WALL.”

Then I paused and focused my stare straight into the panelists eyes, one by one, then proceeded,

“I stand before you today, adjudicated a “pauper”, from the same court charged with conserving” my estate, a probate court, the 7th Circuit Court, Davidson County, Nashville, TN, Judge Randy Kennedy.”

“Four years ago, I had an estate valued at $2.5 million ; now an indigent, a “pauper”, all from a probate court.”

Like many who read this web site, Danny Tate has every reason to be posing serious questions regarding his experience in Davidson County’s 7th Circuit Court presided over by Judge Randy Kennedy. And again like many others, he has met major “walls,” obstacles calculatedly created within a legal system that too often first preys on those before it, then protects those who exploit such opportunity.

In speaking out against Kennedy and the state of Tennessee’s failure to investigate misconduct allegations, Tate has put himself at risk of additional legal, financial and personal harm. And in recent months, concerns for his personal safety are likely not overblown. In fact, after recently being functionally exiled from the State of Tennessee by Homeland Security and despite having informed Senator Mae Beavers, Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, of this development (from which no offer of immunity was tendered), his attendance at this hearing was truly an act creating significant risk to Tate’s own personal safety.

Search

Connect

About

Estate of Denial® provides news, analysis and commentary on abusive probate practices and via wills, trusts, guardianships and powers of attorney. We provide perspective to educate the public regarding this and other growing threats to both individual freedoms and property rights.